This is “Culture and Leadership”, section 2.12 from the book Cultural Intelligence for Leaders (v. 1.0). For details on it (including licensing), click here.
For more information on the source of this book, or why it is available for free, please see the project's home page. You can browse or download additional books there. To download a .zip file containing this book to use offline, simply click here.
What is the importance of understanding cultural value dimensions in businesses? Like other cultural systems, organizational culture controls the behavior, values, assumptions, and beliefs of organizational members. It is a combination of organizational members’ own beliefs and the values, beliefs, and assumptions of the organization. It is the role of the organizational leader, as a change agent, to help create a positive organizational culture that meets the demands of a competitive environment, board and shareholder expectations, and employee career satisfaction.
Since the mid-1990s, the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE)An international group of researchers and social scientists who study multicultural value dimensions, especially how those dimensions are expressed in different cultures. House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta (Eds.) (2004). research of 62 societies has served as a significant study for understanding how cultural value dimensions are expressed in different cultures—whether societal or organizational. Knowledge and awareness of cultural values can enable leaders and managers to effectively manage and work through intercultural conflict and interactions. Over 17,000 managers from 951 organizations in 62 societies participated in focus groups, questionnaires, and interviews for this study.
The GLOBE study found that nine core dimensions of cultures exist in different societies. The first six dimensions in the chart below originated from the cultural value dimensions Geert Hofstede proposed in the 1980s. Table 2.4 "Cultural Dimensions as Researched in the GLOBE Study" lists other dimensions, as well as their definitions, as described in the GLOBE study.House & Javidan (2004), pp. 11–13.
Based on the responses generated by the study and using other research, the GLOBE researchers grouped societies into regional clusters. The clusters were a way of creating meaning around societal views of culture and leadership. Each cluster had characteristics specific to their region, language, religion, history, and shared cultural understanding. Table 2.5 "GLOBE Clusters of Societies" and Table 2.6 "Clusters of Societies and their Cultural Value Dimensions" lists each cluster and the countries that were grouped into the clusters.
The findings of the GLOBE study served to help organizations and societies understand what made an effective or ineffective leader. Many leadership behaviors are similar across societies, pointing out that no matter the cultural difference or society in which a leader is from, there are specific leadership behaviors that are viewed as effective. The GLOBE project was significant in indicating how cultures perceive effective and ineffective leadership, which is helpful to leaders in facilitating intercultural interactions.
The study revealed six global leadership behaviors, which were used in the study to understand how the clusters perceived leadership. These six are charismatic/value-based, team-oriented, participative, humane-oriented, autonomous, and self-protective. Using their understanding of leadership behaviors and perceptions of leadership from each cluster group, the researchers were able to identify a leadership profile for each cluster. Table 2.7 "GLOBE Study of Key Leadership Behaviors" and Table 2.8 "Leadership Behavior Profiles for Clusters" list the six leadership behaviors and their characteristics as well as the leadership profile for each cluster.
Table 2.4 Cultural Dimensions as Researched in the GLOBE Study
Globe Dimension | One Extreme | Other Extreme |
---|---|---|
Uncertainty avoidance | Need for established social norms, rituals, and practices | Comfortable with ambiguity and predictability |
Power distance | Egalitarian and nonhierarchal | Hierarchy, authority, disparity in status and wealth |
Institutional collectivism | Collective actions and sharing of resources encouraged | Individual actions and goals are encouraged |
In-group collectivism | Expressions of pride, loyalty, and cohesion | Noncohesiveness, loyal to oneself and one’s needs |
Gender egalitarianism | Nurture, care, relationships, sharing | Ambition, assertiveness, control |
Assertiveness | Assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in social relationships | Timid, submissive, and tender in social relationships |
Future orientation | Planning, investing, and delays of individual or collective gratification | Spontaneity, enjoying the present |
Performance orientation | Encourages and rewards group performance and excellence | No rewards and encouragement for goals; more relaxed in terms of achievement |
Humane orientation | Encourages and rewards individuals for being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring | Concerns for self, not sensitive, not encouraging of social supports and community values |
Adapted from House et al. (2002) The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
The study also highlighted the perceptions of cultures related to universally desirable and undesirable attributes in leaders. The desirable attributes were viewed as characteristics that were valued and that facilitated the leadership processes. Undesirable attributes were viewed as obstacles and challenges to effective leadership. Table 2.9 "List of Desirable and Undesirable Leadership Attributes from the GLOBE Research" illustrates the positive and negative attributes of effective leadership.
Table 2.5 GLOBE Clusters of Societies
Cluster | Countries |
---|---|
Anglo | Canada, United States, Australia, Ireland, England, South Africa (White sample), New Zealand |
Confucian Asia | Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, South Korea, Japan |
Eastern Europe | Greece, Hungary, Albania, Slovenia, Poland, Russia, Georgia, Kazakhstan |
Germanic Europe | Austria, The Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany-East, Germany-West |
Latin America | Ecuador, El Salvador, Colombia, Bolivia, Brazil, Guatemala, Argentina, Costa Rica, Venezuela, Mexico |
Latin Europe | Israel, Italy, Switzerland (French-speaking), Spain, Portugal, France |
Middle East | Turkey, Kuwait, Egypt, Morocco, Qatar |
Nordic Europe | Denmark, Finland, Sweden |
Southern Asia | Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Thailand, Iran |
Sub-Saharan Africa | Zimbabwe, Namibia, Zambia, Nigeria, South Africa (Black sample) |
Adapted from House et al. (2002) The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Table 2.6 Clusters of Societies and their Cultural Value Dimensions
Cultural Dimension | High-Score Cluster | Low-Score Cluster |
---|---|---|
Uncertainty avoidance | Germanic Europe | Eastern Europe, Latin America |
Nordic Europe | Middle East | |
Power/hierarchy | No Clusters | Nordic Europe |
Institutional collectivism | Nordic Europe | Germanic Europe, Latin America |
Confucian Asia | Latin Europe | |
In-Group collectivism | Confucian Asian, Eastern Europe | Anglo, Germanic Europe |
Latin America, Middle East Southern Asia | Nordic Europe | |
Gender | Eastern Europe | Middle East |
Nordic Europe |
Adapted from House et al. (2002) The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Table 2.7 GLOBE Study of Key Leadership Behaviors
Dimension | Behaviors |
---|---|
Charismatic/value-based leadership | Inspires others, motivates, expect high performance; visionary, self-sacrificing, trustworthy, decisive |
Team-oriented leadership | Team-building, common purpose, collaborative, integrative, diplomatic, not malevolent |
Participative leadership | Participative and not autocratic; inclusive of others |
Humane-oriented leadership | Supportive, considerate, compassionate and generous; modesty and sensitivity |
Autonomous leadership | Independent and individualistic; autonomous and unique |
Self-protective leadership | Ensures the safety and security of the leader and the group; self-centered, status conscious, face-saving, conflict-inducing |
Adapted from House et al. (2002) The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Business leaders have tremendous power to change the organizational culture by utilizing several methods that address the underlying assumptions, beliefs, and values of its members; however, this is not an easy task. Culture, as explained, is oftentimes manifest in unconscious behaviors, values, and assumptions that develop over time and change as new employees enter an organization. The significance of the GLOBE study is that it helps leaders to understand the role of culture in leadership. By understanding one’s culture, as well as that of others, it brings you to awareness of different perceptions of leadership and how cultures come to understand leaders. Recognizing the elements in leadership and culture enables you to leverage the differences that cultures create and to use that to create positive intercultural growth.
Table 2.8 Leadership Behavior Profiles for Clusters
Cluster | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eastern Europe | Autonomous | Self-protective | Charismatic | Team Oriented | Humane | Participative |
Latin America | Charismatic | Team | Self-protective | Participative | Humane | Autonomous |
Latin Europe | Charismatic | Team | Participative | Self-protective | Humane | Autonomous |
Confucian Asia | Self-protective | Team | Humane | Charismatic | Autonomous | Participative |
Nordic Europe | Charismatic | Participative | Team | Autonomous | Humane | Self-protective |
Anglo | Charismatic | Participative | Humane | Team | Autonomous | Self-protective |
Sub-Sahara Africa | Humane | Charismatic | Team | Participative | Self-protective | Autonomous |
Southern Asia | Self-protective | Charismatic | Humane | Team | Autonomous | Participative |
Germanic Europe | Autonomous | Charismatic | Participative | Humane | Team | Self-protective |
Middle East | Self-protective | Humane | Autonomous | Charismatic | Team | Participative |
Adapted from House et al. (2002) The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Table 2.9 List of Desirable and Undesirable Leadership Attributes from the GLOBE Research
Desirable Leadership Attributes | Undesirable Leadership Attributes |
---|---|
Trustworthy | Loner |
Just | Asocial |
Honest | Noncooperative |
Foresight | Irritable |
Plans ahead | Nonexplicit |
Encouraging | Egocentric |
Positive | Ruthless |
Dynamic | Dictatorial |
Motivational | |
Builds confidence | |
Intelligent | |
Dependable | |
Team builder | |
Communicator |
Adapted from House et al. (2002) The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage